Dec

Senators Feinstein and Durbin: No Shield for Citizen Journalists

Wow, I agree with Daily Kos wholeheartedly on a subject (no – it isn’t the hideous Planned Parenthood wallpaper on the page). Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) stripped language from a media sheild bill which would have given ‘citizen journalists’ (bloggers) the same protections as salaried employees or independent contractors to large media outfits. My own Senator (Schumer) got it right for a change, but his comrades are still living in the dark ages.

This isn’t a partisan issue, it’s one between those who are so stuck in the past, that they can’t fathom a more diverse and expansive media environment — one that is no longer dominated by the NY Times and the TV networks.

If you are represented by one of the senators on the committee, please give them a call and ask them to oppose this measure. Again, this shouldn’t be a partisan issue, so calling your Republican senator (for once) might actually make a difference. Committee members are:

Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
Herb Kohl (Wisconsin)
Dianne Feinstein (California)
Russ Feingold (Wisconsin)
Chuck Schumer (New York — he’s kosher on this)
Dick Durbin (Illinois)
Ben Cardin (Maryland)
Sheldon Whitehouse (Rhode Island)
Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota)
Ted Kaufman (Delaware)
Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania — also kosher)
Al Franken (Minnesota)
Jeff Sessions (Alabama)
Orrin Hatch (Utah)
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)
Jon Kyl (Arizona)
Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
John Cornyn (Texas)
Tom Coburn (Oklahoma)

Note — this isn’t about me. I’m a salaried writer. This amendment wouldn’t exclude me. This is about most of you, and countless bloggers and writers who do their own brand of journalism because they believe in their cause, not just because it’s a gig.

Feinstein and Durbin want to relegate you to second-class status in favor of the old media dinosaurs bleeding themselves dry. This is unconscionable. Protect the act of journalism, not people who fit the government’s definition of “journalist”.

Calls for a new fairness doctrine, net neutrality, government regulation of the media, and now this. What’s next?

The language of the Feinstein/Durbin amendment is below the jump.

AMENDMENT NO.__ Calendar No.__

Purpose: To appropriately limit the protection from compelled disclosure.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES—111th Cong., 1st Sess.

S. 448

To maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclo-sure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.

Referred to the Committee on ___ and ordered to be printed Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed

AMENDMENTS intended to be proposed by Mrs. F EINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. D URBIN )

Viz:

In section 10(2)(A), strike clause (iii) and insert the following:

(iii) obtains the information sought while working as a salaried employee of, or independent contractor for, an entity—

(I) that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, 1or other means; and

(II) that—

(aa) publishes a newspaper, book, magazine, or other periodical;

(bb) operates a radio or television broadcast station, network, cable system, or satellite carrier, or a channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier;

(cc) operates a programming service; or

(dd) operates a news agency or wire service;

In section 10(2)(B), strike ‘‘and’’ at the end.

In section 10(2)(C), strike the period at the end and insert ‘‘; and’’.

In section 10(2), add at the end the following:

(D) does not include an individual who gathers or disseminates the protected information sought to be compelled anonymously or under a pseudonym.